The Lifecycle Family: Why the ML Name Matters

Two Lifecycles, Different Journeys

At a glance, both software and machine learning projects start with an idea, go through development stages, and aim for deployment. But beneath the surface, they follow different journeys:

• Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC): SDLC is about writing code to create a well-defined, functional product. It follows phases such as requirements gathering, design, coding, testing, deployment, and maintenance. Once a software solution is built and deployed, maintenance focuses on bug fixes, feature upgrades, and performance improvements.
• Machine Learning Lifecycle (MLLC): In ML, the process involves data collection, preprocessing, feature engineering, model training, evaluation, deployment, and monitoring. Unlike software, ML models require constant retraining to stay relevant, as new data changes the dynamics. Additionally, the "product" isn’t just code—it’s also the underlying data and the model's accuracy over time.

What’s in a Name?

Why does it matter that we distinguish between these lifecycles? The key lies in collaboration and roles. A software engineer can typically operate independently within a development team, but ML demands cross-disciplinary collaboration. The success of a machine learning model hinges on bringing together:

1. Data Scientists: Experts in data wrangling, feature selection, and model design.
2. Data Engineers: Builders of pipelines that ensure data flows seamlessly into the ML systems.
3. ML Engineers: Focused on training and deploying models.
4. DevOps/MLOps Specialists: Responsible for the infrastructure that enables continuous deployment, scaling, and monitoring of models.

The overlap between ML lifecycle and DevOps practices gave rise to MLOps, a hybrid discipline that emphasizes continuous integration, continuous delivery (CI/CD) for ML models, and model monitoring to detect drift or performance decay. This field embodies the reality that machine learning systems are never “done”—they evolve continuously.

?The Key Differences: Iteration and Feedback Loops

Both lifecycles involve iterations, but the frequency and purpose of these loops vary:

• In software development, iterations are often feature-driven—adding a new capability or fixing an issue.
• In ML, iteration is data-driven—new data requires a fresh model or retraining to maintain accuracy.

Additionally, the feedback loops in ML systems are longer and more unpredictable. A model can perform well today but fail six months later if the data shifts. This unpredictability requires constant monitoring and retraining, which isn’t typical in traditional software development.

?

Why MLOps Makes the Difference

MLOps practices bridge the gap between the technical lifecycles and organizational needs. They bring several advantages:

• Automated Pipelines: Ensuring models are retrained and deployed regularly without manual intervention.
• Model Versioning: Keeping track of multiple model iterations to ensure reproducibility.
• Monitoring and Alerts: Detecting when model performance declines or data drift occurs, enabling proactive action.
• Scalable Infrastructure: Using tools like Kubernetes, TensorFlow Serving, or Rancher to support seamless deployment.

Why is it Important?

Understanding the unique lifecycle of ML helps teams sidestep common challenges, such as outdated models or poorly managed infrastructure. With collaboration as a central element, MLOps fosters smooth workflows by ensuring seamless coordination across roles—from data scientists to engineers—eliminating friction along the way.

?

Aligning the Lifecycle Family

Recognizing the differences between SDLC and MLLC is not about creating barriers but aligning efforts. Both lifecycles contribute to delivering solutions, but they demand distinct processes, collaboration frameworks, and expectations.

With MLOps practices in place, organizations can successfully manage the complexities of ML deployment, balancing the technical demands of each lifecycle while ensuring that models deliver real value over time. The key takeaway is that understanding these lifecycles isn’t just technical jargon—it’s a necessity for any organization that wants to build, deploy, and maintain ML systems effectively.

The ML name matters because it reflects more than just a process—it reflects a paradigm shift in how solutions are created, deployed, and maintained. Those who understand the lifecycle family are better equipped to lead the way in both software development and machine learning.